Form 1 SBR "disapproved" because AW are Illegal in MD??

[Wayne1one]

Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't really see what difference it makes.

Well unless you parade it around, there is no way to prove when you built out your pre Oct 2013 lower. So this means that you are not restricted to hbar and the other crap that comes with post Oct 2013. Even if you simply build out your lower pre Oct all you need to do is mount it to a "assault rifle" configured upper and it would be (in theory) grandfathered in. Pre Oct lowers do have a little more wiggle room than post.

 

[aaronn]

Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't really see what difference it makes.

If you want a non-HBAR 16"+ AR you can't pick up a lower for it now. However, you can still pick up lowers to SBR.

 

[HT4]

Glad this turned out to be nothing...

 

[outrider58]

Maybe i'm missing something here but, an SBR lower can be reconfigured(visa vi different uppers) in any manor once ok'd, you wish. As long as it can readily be returned to its original configuration, and it is never configured into a gun with a shorter OAL than its original length. I don't think barrel profile is in play here. Or is it?

 

[Wayne1one]

Maybe i'm missing something here but, an SBR lower can be reconfigured in any manor once ok'd, you wish. As long as it can readily be returned to its original configuration(visa vi, different uppers), and it is never configured into a gun with a shorter OAL than its original length. I don't think barrel profile is in play here. Or is it?

Depends on who you ask, better not ask too many questions though........

 

[teratos]

Maybe i'm missing something here but, an SBR lower can be reconfigured(visa vi different uppers) in any manor once ok'd, you wish. As long as it can readily be returned to its original configuration, and it is never configured into a gun with a shorter OAL than its original length. I don't think barrel profile is in play here. Or is it?

You can't make a post ban gun into a pre-ban configuration. It is magic. Try it, and your nuts will turn into raisins.

 

[rdc]

Cpl Edwards is good dude. I think I might send him a fruit basket.

However, like I said before this stinks of some ATF CYA from a higher supervisor. That link is the advisory they sent out in May, and the ATF (specifically Ted Clutter) is already well aware of this ruling\advisory. Something really stinks!

Cpl Edwards is a class act. He helped my wife out a bunch earlier this year when ATF was giving her grief about a MG transfer

 

[pwoolford]

You can't make a post ban gun into a pre-ban configuration. It is magic. Try it, and your nuts will turn into raisins.

Your nuts turn into raisins due to the super electro-magnetic mega couplers installed in the uppers/lowers after October 2013. They only allow certain configurations.

 

[SWO Daddy]

If you want a non-HBAR 16"+ AR you can't pick up a lower for it now. However, you can still pick up lowers to SBR.

Sure, but you can still plop a 20" pencil profile barrel on an SBR lower. It would make sense if you had one of each and were picking one to SBR, I suppose.

 

[Captnstabn]

Is there a way to add this letter from the msp to a pending SBR application? I submitted it 12/2, and don't want it kicked back for stupidity.

 

[SWO Daddy]

Is there a way to add this letter from the msp to a pending SBR application? I submitted it 12/2, and don't want it kicked back for stupidity.

Yes, just click on your submitted draft and add it in the appropriate spot, then hit save.

 

[Sticky]

I have heard, from some locals talking to the ATF, that they are waiting for a ruling or letter from the AG and holding apps til then from MD for SBR's. I hope this will satisfy the delays for those doing form 1's.

 

[Captnstabn]

Yes, just click on your submitted draft and add it in the appropriate spot, then hit save.

I tried to do that, and it said it couldn't save due to the forms status. Then it saved it as a new draft on my main page.

EDIT - nevermind, i just went back and checked and the uploaded form was there after I logged out and then back in.

 

[drfroglegs]

I tried to do that, and it said it couldn't save due to the forms status. Then it saved it as a new draft on my main page.

EDIT - nevermind, i just went back and checked and the uploaded form was there after I logged out and then back in.

Yeah, I uploaded it to my re-application, selected "other" as the document type, and put "proof from MSP of legal SBR status."

I emailed Ted and asked him if it was possible for him to go ahead and examine my new application (so I don't have to wait another month), but no reply. I was hoping to give you guys a final answer as to whether they are accepting this letter or not.

I wouldn't say we're out of the water yet, keep in mind they have already seen this letter (it was created FOR THEM). I don't know if there was a policy change or a mental-flatulation? Either way, I still don't know if this satisfies their requirement for "proof of legal status."

He made it sound like he wanted me to take my rifle to MSP and get them to state in a letter that they have examined the lower and it is a legal configuration.. If that's the case, they are dumber than I originally thought and Cpl Edwards will probably lose his freaking mind!

 

[OrbitalEllipses]

What's wrong with a SCAR SBR that has a folding stock? As long as it doesn't have a second feature (e.g. flash hider) it should be golden.

 

[drfroglegs]

Bottom line...if what you are doing is totally legal, as you have said, then stop your bitchin', get the letter from MSP and re-submit.

If, however, you want a legal battle, at least employ a lawyer, because you don't know what you're talking about, and neither BATFE nor MSP will be intimidated by your righteous indignation. That stuff only works on Internet forums.

You obviously didn't read my post where I contacted police Cpl Edwards and obtained a letter stating that making an SBR is legal in MD. I also linked it so that others can attach it to their form 1, which many have now done. I have also personally forward the email sent from Cpl Edwards so others can attach that email (alone with the letter).

I understand your argument, that is just simply not how anyone is interpreting the law except you.

I can make a gun tomorrow and call it an AR15, that doesn't mean it is.. In order for it to be an AR15, it has to fit the classification of what they call a "copycat" of the AR15.. If not, it's not a copycat. If I manufacture a 10-22 and give it a model number AR15, that doesn't make it a Colt AR15. If I filled out the Form 1 for that "10-22 style" that I gave model# AR15, that still would not make it a Colt AR15. It has to fit the copycat description to be considered a copy of the Colt AR15, otherwise it is not.

 

[IMBLITZVT]

Completely irrelevant...an AR-15 is banned by virtue of being an AR-15, not a "copycat". It is explicitly listed in the law, which means that even without the "copycat" provision, it is DEFINED, IN THE LAW, as an "assault long gun".......
People in MD have only been able to build AR15 SBRs because of one or two things. Either:

1) MSP is as confused as us interpreting the law, they also don't understand how a "pistol" can be a "long gun" and have allowed SBR forms to go through because of the arse-backwards way FSA2013 has been written, OR

2) MSP has as much contempt for the "infringers" as we do, and is purposely not enforcing these provisions or approving these transfers.

BATFE is not MSP. They have a valid interpretation of the law in saying that "AR15s are not legal in Maryland". ...

No... you are not understanding the system. Just because it has AR15 on it does not mean its illegal. If ford makes an AR15 Ford car.... its not banned. A long rifle and a SBR are different. A pistol is not a Long rifle. The AR15 Long gun is banned. Not the pistol, Not the MG and not the SBR. MSP is wrongly applying the copy cat clause to NFA items that have rifle in the term. They did this under political pressure and I bet will not stand any legal challenge. There are FA AR15 MGs out there. They have not and have never been restricted by the previous registration requirement and now ban. Same with SBRs until now. You clearly are not understanding the tier system under which the ATF and MSP follow. Its the same reason why you can buy a AR15 MG post FSA and drop a pencil barrel AR15 upper on it legally. It may look indentical to an AR15 and may even have Colt AR15 written on the side. However with it being a MG, its not longer restricted as a long rifle as its no longer even a rifle.

 

[drfroglegs]

No... you are not understanding the system. Just because it has AR15 on it does not mean its illegal. If ford makes an AR15 Ford car.... its not banned. A long rifle and a SBR are different. A pistol is not a Long rifle. The AR15 Long gun is banned. Not the pistol, Not the MG and not the SBR. MSP is wrongly applying the copy cat clause to NFA items that have rifle in the term. They did this under political pressure and I bet will not stand any legal challenge. There are FA AR15 MGs out there. They have not and have never been restricted by the previous registration requirement and now ban. Same with SBRs until now. You clearly are not understanding the tier system under which the ATF and MSP follow. Its the same reason why you can buy a AR15 MG post FSA and drop a pencil barrel AR15 upper on it legally. It may look indentical to an AR15 and may even have Colt AR15 written on the side. However with it being a MG, its not longer restricted as a long rifle as its no longer even a rifle.

This is exactly what I said in my last post..

Here is how I understand it...

Colt AR15:

Imitation of Colt AR15 (RRA National Match)

Copycat of colt AR15 (because of folding stock) that is banned

Mine does not resemble any of those rifles and thus is legal. It is not a Colt AR15, or an imitation of a Colt AR15 (model # is irrelevant, you can assign any model number you want to a rifle, doesn't make it the same as another gun with the same model number).

My rifle does not fit the description of a "copycat" either. It has to be legal according to the law and according to Cpl Edwards himself.

The ATF only asked me to obtain "verification" that the rifle is legal, they did not say they interpreted it as illegal. They're just covering their own asses (again) by making sure my/MSP interpretation of the law is correct. It is, according to Cpl Edwards, so my application should now be approved.

 

[SWO Daddy]

No... you are not understanding the system. Just because it has AR15 on it does not mean its illegal. If ford makes an AR15 Ford car.... its not banned. A long rifle and a SBR are different. A pistol is not a Long rifle. The AR15 Long gun is banned. Not the pistol, Not the MG and not the SBR. MSP is wrongly applying the copy cat clause to NFA items that have rifle in the term. They did this under political pressure and I bet will not stand any legal challenge. There are FA AR15 MGs out there. They have not and have never been restricted by the previous registration requirement and now ban. Same with SBRs until now. You clearly are not understanding the tier system under which the ATF and MSP follow. Its the same reason why you can buy a AR15 MG post FSA and drop a pencil barrel AR15 upper on it legally. It may look indentical to an AR15 and may even have Colt AR15 written on the side. However with it being a MG, its not longer restricted as a long rifle as its no longer even a rifle.

This is how I understand it as well.

 

[IMBLITZVT]

This is exactly what I said in my last post..

Yeah, I did not see your post until I posted. You are correct.